Will the Good Lord Carry Open or Conceal

The question here is whether the Lord, upon his triumphant return, will be Open Carry or Conceal Carry. In my mind, there could be no other possible options; it must be one or the other. In assuming his return targets these United States as worthy lands to tender his Reign, the choices must be considered. The odd coupling of the zealot religious right and the zealous NRA supporters would certainly not allow there to be another choice than for the Lord to be pro-gun. The Right has demonstrated their stranglehold on Righteousness, there can be no other view. Therefore, I ask the question sincerely, would the Lord Carry Open, or Conceal?

There is some expectation that America will be one site of this celestial return to Terra Firma. At least He would be expected to set foot on US Soil at some point to assume control of the Government. As one of the World’s Super Powers, certainly it would be on his checklist for celestial conquest. To control the country the One would need to establish reigning control of the Constitution.

Ah, the Constitution! It is by the Constitution that we as citizens defend our right to bear arms. It is written there, plain and simple. "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." 

How much the Lord is bound by this Constitution will be up for debate. Several key stipulations will require amending if one is to Reign over the land for 1000 years. The twenty second amendment sets a term limit of 2 terms for President. That would certainly have to be adjusted, amended. 

Section 1 Article 2 states “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. There are several Constitutional issues in jeopardy here; primarily He must be ‘natural born’, and a ‘Citizen of the United States’.  Certainly records indicate that his birth may have touched the boundaries of ‘Natural’ , and his citizenship would have been originally recorded on a Roman Census, as a Hebrew resident of a Judean state not destined to be part of these United States.

I am not sure it would be for the Office of President he would seek, but as of today the office of King of Kings is not provided for in the Constitution. There are enough restrictions in the current Constitution to assume that a reigning Lord would need to throw aside much of the Constitution, usurp it, in order to set the wheels in motion to establish his 1,000 year reign. Retaining the Right to Bear Arms through a dismantled Constitution could be a challenging endeavor. But as voiced by the Right, "I'll give you my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead hands".  It is likely the most secure portion of the Constitution to be retained in a post return America would be the Right to bare Arms. It is certainly the most protected and revered.

One must assume that the Religious Right, united with their NRA brothers will make up the main body of this righteously endowed America. The Righteous Army in place to secure the land is most likely to come from this population. Certainly, the oddballs of the extreme right will be properly relieved of Power; after all you can’t have Nazi Skinheads in the Grand Army of the Righteous.  That would certainly be a conflict of Interest for a King of Jewish descent.  But still, taking the wackos out of the question you are still left with the ‘moral majority’, this odd mixture of Christian and gun carrying conservatives.  One must assume that there is no place for the Left in this theocratic monarchy.

Therefore, the question is repeated, would the Good Lord advocate for conceal or open carry?

To start the debate for the Conceal side, I came up with these quotes:

It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.  Proverbs 25:2.

In His right hand He held seven stars, and out of His mouth came a sharp two-edged sword; and His face was like the sun shining in its strength. Revelations 1:16

When you go out to battle against your enemies and see horses and chariots and people more numerous than you, do not be afraid of them; for the LORD your God, who brought you up from the land of Egypt, is with you. Deuteronomy 20:1

Then David said to the Philistine, "You come to me with a sword, a spear, and a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the LORD of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have taunted. "This day the LORD will deliver you up into my hands, and I will strike you down and remove your head from you. And I will give the dead bodies of the army of the Philistines this day to the birds of the sky and the wild beasts of the earth, that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel, and that all this assembly may know that the LORD does not deliver by sword or by spear; for the battle is the LORD'S and He will give you into our hands." 1 Samuel 17:45-47

On the Open Carry side we have these Biblical Quotes:

Hebrews 4:13 - And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.

Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men's hearts; and then each man's praise will come to him from God. 

1 Corinthians 4:5

The sons of Israel did things secretly which were not right against the LORD their God. Moreover, they built for themselves high places in all their towns, from watchtower to fortified city.  2 Kings 17:9

From that day on, half of my servants carried on the work while half of them held the spears, the shields, the bows and the breastplates; and the captains were behind the whole house of Judah. Those who were rebuilding the wall and those who carried burdens took their load with one hand doing the work and the other holding a weapon. As for the builders, each wore his sword girded at his side as he built, while the trumpeter stood near me. Nehemiah 4:16-18

I am not sure I am able to solve the conundrum, ‘Carry Open or Conceal’, using the King James Version.  As usual, there are scholars well beyond my skill that will be necessary to resolve this debate. 

 I encourage them to pipe in now by using the comments below. My suspicion is that the choice may well entail a discussion of which option makes the most sense monetarily for the Gun Lobby. Or, perhaps the answer will be to carry open and conceal in tandem. As they say, 'the Good Lord hates a coward'.

Cheers, nca

The Second Bear Was Too Soft

The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads 'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Let me go on record to say that I am jiggy with it.

And let me also go on record that I am ok with some laws that restrict what arms can be carried and by whom.

Is that a contradiction? Maybe so.

There are some restrictions that are already in place,undisputed. An example of this is that I can't tote a Thermonuclear bomb in my F150 to the Fry's parking lot.  I think we are all in agreement on that one. Also, I would probably have pretty universal agreement that I can't go patrolling the riverbed down by the Airport with a FIM-92 Stinger positioned on my shoulder.  Other restrictions can probably also be agreed upon. Do we want a five year old child walking down the street with a sawed off shotgun?  Do we want convicted rapists and murderers walking into the church with concealed 22 mag Glocks?  Do we think it is kosher to allow target practice on the grounds of a nursery, or a national cemetery, or in Grand Central Station?

Since I am guessing we can agree that none of this is acceptable behavior anywhere in this country, I think it is safe to say that we are all willing to negotiate what controls are acceptable. 

Let's face it, when our Founding Father's wrote the 2nd amendment, their Arms of choice were single action, muzzle loading, extremely inaccurate, heavy, with no rifling. The ammunition involved leaden Minie balls with no jackets.  It would take a good minute to load and fire, and the destruction rendered would likely be limited to one target.  I am not saying the right to bear arms needs to be restricted to the arms of 1789 when the Amendment was ratified, but it does help to have their perspective of the capabilities when they wrote the Amendment.

We should be able to agree that some restrictions are necessary, and that our Founding Father's did not fully realize the damage potential that Arms would advance to over the next 250 years.

So now, in my reasoning I think it should be possible to sit down at a table and discuss necessary restrictions and controls in a intelligent manner.  If we had been able to restrict the recent killers across America, theater shooters, school shooters, highway shooters, and all the rest to single action muzzle loading un-rifled flintlocks, then much less damage would have been done.  Is this realistic....no. I fully understand the reality of that.  But it is realistic that some degree of control can be regulated, hashed out in intelligent debate.  

Am I the right person to make these decisions. Probably not. I do not carry. And I do not oppose those who choose to carry.  I have found great enjoyment in target shooting over the years, but I am not a sportsman or hunter.  I am willing to be educated on what controls are necessary and which are not.  I myself have thought that allowing concealed weapons in schools and public places is not a good idea.  I also think restrictions on automated weapons, and restrictions on extreme magazines is a good idea. But I am willing to hear the debate with an open mind. But, after the debate is done, I am not alone to think that some changes, including gun controls, are warranted and overdue.

Therefore, let me go on record that I do feel the debate needs to happen, soon, and in a very intelligent and open minded way. I would like to feel that my daughters can be safe in movie theaters and church, and that my grand-children can be safe at school.  My United States is not a third world country, and these precious children should be able to live safe lives protected from the extreme crazies that are already planning their next tragic hits.  If we don't feel that this is possible, in these United States, than something very wrong is going on. 

Cheers, nca